Alphabeta Math
CorollaryStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedSession-authored (Fable 5 assisted)precheck passaudited 2026-08-27
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

A radical ideal in a Noetherian ring is a finite intersection of minimal primes

Statement

Let R be a Noetherian commutative ring and let IR be a radical ideal. Then there exist prime ideals p1,,pm minimal over I such that I=p1pm; when I=R, this means m=0 and the empty intersection is R. In particular, I has only finitely many minimal prime ideals.

The proof uses Noetherian induction and inherits the dependent-choice cost already recorded there; it introduces no further choice principle.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A Noetherian commutative ring R and a radical ideal IR.

[L2]

If a proper radical ideal is not prime, then every prime minimal over it is minimal over one of two strictly larger ideals I+(x) or I+(y) obtained from a factorization xyI with x,yI (The Noetherian minimal-prime induction split).

[L3]

Radicals of products satisfy JK=JK (The radical of a product of ideals).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1

Let P be the collection of radical ideals JR for which there exist finitely many prime ideals minimal over J whose intersection equals J. By [L1], it is enough to fix a radical ideal I and assume that every radical ideal strictly containing I lies in P.

L1given
1.2

If I=R, then no prime ideal contains I, and the empty intersection is R. So IP in this boundary case.

givenalgebra
1.3

If I is prime, then I itself is the unique prime minimal over I, so IP.

given
1.4

Assume now that I is neither R nor prime. Then I is a proper radical ideal, so [L2] applies: choose x,yI with xyI, and set J=I+(x) and K=I+(y). Because I is radical and x,yI, both J and K strictly contain I. Hence the induction hypothesis places both J and K in P, and [L2] also says that every prime minimal over I is minimal over I+(x) or over I+(y).

L2choosealgebra
2.1

Choose finite families of prime ideals minimal over J and K with J=p1pr and K=q1qs. The product (I+(x))(I+(y)) is contained in I: expanding (a+rx)(b+sy) gives terms in I because a,bI and xyI. Therefore JK=(I+(x))(I+(y))I by [L3]. The reverse inclusion IJK is immediate, so I=p1prq1qs.

L3step 1.4choosealgebra
3.1

By step 1.4, every prime minimal over I belongs to the finite family F={p1,,pr,q1,,qs}. Let MF be the subfamily of inclusion-minimal members. Every element of M is a prime ideal minimal over I, and every prime in F contains some member of M because F is finite. Removing a prime ideal that contains another one does not change an intersection, so the intersection over M is still I. Thus IP.

step 1.4step 2.1algebra
4.1

Steps 1.2, 1.3, and 3.1 establish the induction step promised in step 1.1. Therefore every radical ideal of R is an intersection of finitely many prime ideals minimal over it, and in particular has only finitely many minimal prime ideals.

step 1.1step 1.2step 1.3step 3.1

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

7 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources